DOCSLIB.ORG

Nordmann's Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nordmann's Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi Final Report Nordmann’s Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi Cipto Dwi Handono1, Ragil Siti Rihadini1, Iwan Febrianto1 and Ahmad Zulfikar Abdullah1 1Yayasan Ekologi Satwa Alam Liar Indonesia (Yayasan EKSAI/EKSAI Foundation) Surabaya, Indonesia Background Many shorebirds species have declined along East Asian-Australasian Flyway which support the highest diversity of shorebirds in the world, including the globally endangered species, Nordmann’s Greenshank. Nordmann’s Greenshank listed as endangered in the IUCN Red list of Threatened Species because of its small and declining population (BirdLife International, 2016). It’s one of the world’s most threatened shorebirds, is confined to the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (Bamford et al. 2008, BirdLife International 2001, 2012). Its global population is estimated at 500–1,000, with an estimated 100 in Malaysia, 100–200 in Thailand, 100 in Myanmar, plus unknown but low numbers in NE India, Bangladesh and Sumatra (Wetlands International 2006). The population is suspected to be rapidly decreasing due to coastal wetland development throughout Asia for industry, infrastructure and aquaculture, and the degradation of its breeding habitat in Russia by grazing Reindeer Rangifer tarandus (BirdLife International 2012). Mostly Nordmann’s Greenshanks have been recorded in very small numbers throughout Southeast Asia, and there are few places where it has been reported regularly. In Myanmar, for example, it was rediscovered after a gap of almost 129 years. The total count recorded by the Asian Waterbird Census (AWC) in 2006 for Myanmar was 28 birds with 14 being the largest number at a single locality (Naing 2007). In 2011–2012, Nordmann’s Greenshank was found three times in Sumatera Utara province, N Sumatra. First, a flock of 13 birds was recorded on 17 Nov 2011 at Tanjung Rejo village (3°44'N, 98°46'E), Percut Sei Tuan Subdistrict. The other two records both relate to birds seen just 8 km from the first site at Sei Tuan village (3°42'N, 98°50'E), Pantai Labu Subdistrict three on 15 Dec 2011, and four on 13 Jan 2012 (Abdillah, Hasri and M. Iqbal, 2012). During Far Eastern Curlew Survey, November 2019, we recorded 28 individuals of Nordmann’s Greenshank at Pantai Cemara, Jambi. This showed the potency of Pantai Cemara as one important site for Nordmann’s Greenshank in Indonesia. Objective Provide an updated data of Nordmann’s Greenshank population at Pantai Cemara Jambi Identify the potencies and threats at Pantai Cemara as stopping site for Nordmann’s Greenshank species Do the survey with local team to increase their identification ability Ecosystem Essential Area, Pantai Cemara, Desa Sungai Cemara, Tanjung Jabung Timur Region, Jambi Fig 01. Map of Pantai Cemara - Essential Ecosystem Area, Jambi (Ministry of Environment and Forestry Republic of Indonesia, 2019) Site Status : Protected as Ecosystem Essential Area (Managed by Forestry Department of Jambi Province) currently in the process to be proposed as Flyway Site Network Potency : - This site was visited by more than ten thousands of migratory shorebirds which searching for feeding and roosting ground during their migratory journey (Unpublished data of Migratory Shorebird Survey at Pantai Cemara, Jambi 2019). - Local people in this site are eager to learn and involving them self to be the part of migratory shorebirds conservation. They see these birds as the potency of their village. - Local government fully support the development and conservation activities for this site Threat : Direct threat - Forest fire (but the effect are not as big as Sembilang NP) - Natural Predator (Eagle observed prey on Charadrius mongolus during the monitoring) - Plastic waste - Massive growth of Ipomea sp. and Avicennia sp. Fig 02. Observation point at Pantai Cemara - Essential Ecosystem Area (Google Earth 2020) Survey Method We did our survey from November 17th, 2020 to November 21st, 2020 (5 days). We determine one observation point which will be able to access the wide beach with mixed sandy beach substrate type. We did the monitoring and training to the local people and local ranger during the monitoring activity. We reach the observation point by boat, and continue by foot. Note about the habitat condition There are massive growth of grass, Ipomea sp.and Avicennia sp. from 2019 (Fig.03). Fig 03. Massive growth of grass, Ipomea sp., and Avicenna sp. Survey Result Table 01 : Result of Survey Activity at Pantai Cemara, Jambi between November 17th, 2020 - November 21st, 2020. IUCN NO Spesies English Name Local Name Population Trend 17 18 19 20 21 Status 1 Egretta eulopotes Chinese Egret Kuntul Cina Decreasing VU 1 1 1 1 1 DD (Data 2 Charadrius dealbatus White-Faced Plover Unknown Deficient) 2 0 1 1 1 3 Charadrius leschenaultii Greater Sandplover Cerek Pasir Besar Decreasing LC 412 4 89 368 438 4 Pluvialis squatarola Grey Plover Cerek Besar Decreasing LC 48 28 17 7 34 5 Charadrius mongolus Lesser Sandplover Cerek Pasir Mongolia Unknown LC 239 337 354 535 476 6 Pluvialis fulva Pacific Golden Plover Cerek Krenyut Decreasing LC 8 13 2 7 4 7 Charadrius alexandrinus Kentish Plover Cerek Tilil Decreasing LC 0 0 0 0 0 8 Charadrius peronii Malay Plover Cerek Melayu Decreasing NT 1 0 1 1 0 9 Charadrius javanicus Javan Plover Cerek Jawa Decreasing NT 2 2 1 2 0 10 Hydropogne caspia Caspian Tern Dara Laut Caspia Increasing LC 32 20 23 41 44 11 Sterna hirundo Common Tern Dara Laut Biasa Decreasing LC 0 0 0 0 0 12 Gelochelidon nilotica Common Gull-billed Tern Dara Laut Tiram Decreasing LC 0 0 0 0 0 13 Thallasseus bergii Greater Crested Tern Dara Laut Jambul Stable LC 19 20 14 0 10 14 Stenula albifrons Little Tern Dara Laut Kecil Decreasing LC 35 30 27 38 27 15 Calidris tenuirostris Great Knot Kedidi Besar Decreasing EN 20 38 301 366 138 16 Numenius madagascariensis Far Eastern Curlew Gajahan Timur Decreasing EN 35 8 18 11 24 17 Tringa guttifer Spotted Greenshank Trinil Nordmann Decreasing EN 21 11 6 0 5 18 Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper Trinil Rawa Decreasing LC 26 20 22 16 17 19 Xenus cinereus Terek Sandpiper Trinil Bedaran Decreasing LC 87 74 125 36 26 20 Tringa totanus Common Redshank, Redshank Trinil Kaki Merah Unknown LC 30 38 29 4 17 21 Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel Gajahan Penggala Decreasing LC 17 21 18 24 20 22 Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper Trinil Pantai Decreasing LC 1 1 1 1 1 23 Arenaria interpres Rudy Turnstone Trinil Pembalik Batu Decreasing LC 2 2 2 0 0 24 Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank Trinil Kaki Hijau Stable LC 21 24 24 18 16 25 Calidris alba Sanderling Kedidi Putih Unknown LC 1 1 2 1 1 26 Limnodromus semipalmatus Asian Dowitcher Trinil Lumpur Asia Decreasing NT 125 234 70 78 68 27 Limosa limosa Black-tailed Godwit Biru Laut Ekor Hitam Decreasing NT 5 525 220 328 469 28 Limosa lapponica Bar-tailed Godwit Biru Laut Ekor Blorok Decreasing NT 520 485 562 569 368 29 Calidris canutus Red Knot Kedidi Merah Decreasing NT 0 0 0 0 0 30 Numenius arquata Eurasian Curlew Gajahan Besar Decreasing NT 44 25 14 26 77 31 Calidris ruficolis Red Necked Stint Kedidi Leher Merah Decreasing NT 270 248 130 137 278 32 Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper Kedidi Gol-Gol Decreasing NT 183 174 159 201 230 33 Glareola maldivarum Oriental Pratincole Terik Asia LC 0 0 0 0 1 2207 2384 2233 2817 2791 Table 02 : Maximum Count of Far Eastern Curlew at Pantai Cemara, Jambi Maximum Count of Nordmann’s Greenshank 2019 28 2020 21 Table 03 : Maximum Count of Migratory Waterbird recorded at Pantai Cemara, Jambi Maximum Count of Migratory Waterbirds recorded 2019 17,032 2020 2,817 Table 04 : Maximum Count of Godwit recorded at Pantai Cemara, Jambi Maximum Count of Maximum Count of Maximum Count of Maximum Count of Maximum Count of Far Black-tailed Godwit Bar-tailed Godwit Asian Dowitcher Great Knot Eastern Curlew 2019 3,700 2,700 564 1950 38 2020 525 520 234 366 35 Fig 04. Chart of Nordmann’s Greenshank Max. Count Fig 05. Chart of Near Threatened and Endangered Species at Pantai Cemara (2019 &2020) Data 2019 and 2020 (unpublished data, EKSAI) (unpublished data, EKSAI). Pantai Cemara located at Desa Sungai Cemara, Tanjung Jabung Timur Region, Jambi Province. It is designited as Essential Ecosystem Area in 2018 by the Governer of Jambi Province. This site known as one of the most important site for migratory shorebird along Sumatra Island. With mixed sandy beach texture of it’s substrate, this site used by more than ten thousands migratory shorebirds from 32 species (unpublished data, EKSAI Foundation). In 2019 we also recorded three endangered species of migratory shorebird roosting and feeding on this site. We recorded 28 individuals of Spotted Greenshank (more than 1% of it’s population), 38 individuals of Far Eastern Curlew and 1950 individuals of Great Knot. This result showed the potency of this site as one of the most important site for migratory shorebirds in Indonesia. Generally, this numbers are declining on 2020 as we seen on table 01 and table 04. If we see table 02, the number of Nordmann’s Greenshank also declining this year, even not drastically declining like Godwit. The major change of Pantai Cemara mudflat is a massive growth of it’s vegetation (Ipomea sp., unidentified grass, mangroves and sea pine). During the survey, we notice that Nordmann’s Greenshank and other large shorebirds like Godwit, Curlew, and Asian Dowitcher and Great Knot never roost or foraging on mudflat with vegetation. Open mudflat without vegetation provide a better access to their prey (Finn et al, 2008). Despite the habitat change, Pantai Cemara still provide a suitable non-breeding site for more than 1% of Nordmann’s Greenshank global population.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2016 Checklist of Florida'a Birds
    Artwork by Ann Marie Tavares 2016 Checklist of Florida’s Birds Prepared by Dr. Greg Schrott and Andy Wraithmell The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Florida’s wild places are home to an incredible diversity of birds. Over 500 native bird species or naturally occurring strays have been recorded in the state in historic times, and about 330 native species commonly occur here (four have gone extinct). A further 14 nonnative species are considered to have established large, stable populations in Florida. More than 70 natural community types support this diversity, from the pine flatwoods of Apalachicola National Forest, to the scrub communities of the Lake Wales Ridge, and the vast sawgrass marshes and mangrove swamps of Everglades National Park. Our natural areas harbor many bird species seen nowhere else in the United States such as the Florida Scrub-Jay, Mangrove Cuckoo, and Snail Kite. In addition, Florida’s birdlife changes with the cycle of the seasons. A constant turnover of breeding, wintering and migratory species provides new birding experiences throughout the year. To help you keep track of the spectacular range of birdlife the state has to offer, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) has published this checklist. The first edition of Checklist of Florida’s Birds was prepared by Dr. Henry M. Stevenson in 1986. During his lifetime, Dr. Stevenson made many contributions to the field of ornithology, culminating with his writing The Birdlife of Florida with Bruce H. Anderson (1994). This book offers the most comprehensive information published on the lives of Florida’s birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015)
    IUCN Red List version 2015.4: Table 7 Last Updated: 19 November 2015 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2014 (IUCN Red List version 2014.3) and 2015 (IUCN Red List version 2015-4) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2014) List (2015) change version Category Category MAMMALS Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC NT N 2015-2 Ailurus fulgens Red Panda VU EN N 2015-4
    [Show full text]
  • Migratory Shorebirds Management Plan
    Report GLNG Curtis Island Marine Facilities Migratory Shorebirds Environmental Management Plan 17 MARCH 2011 Prepared for GLNG Operations Pty Ltd Level 22 Santos Place 32 Turbot Street Brisbane Qld 4000 42626727 Project Manager: URS Australia Pty Ltd Level 16, 240 Queen Street Angus McLeod Brisbane, QLD 4000 Senior Ecologist GPO Box 302, QLD 4001 Australia T: 61 7 3243 2111 Principal-In-Charge: F: 61 7 3243 2199 Chris Pigott Senior Principal Author: Angus McLeod Senior Ecologist Reviewer: Date: 17 March 2011 Reference: 42626727/01/03 Status: Final Chris Pratt Principal Environmental Scientist j:\jobs\42626727\5 works\draft emp\for tina 17.3.11\3310-glng-3-3 3-0065_shorebirds_final_17 03 2011.doc Table of Contents Abbreviations............................................................................................................iii Executive Summary..................................................................................................iv 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Background .........................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose of the Migratory Shorebirds Environment Management Plan ...................................................................................................................1 1.3 Aims and Objectives ........................................................................................3 1.4 Study Area ........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Billed Curlew Distributions in Intertidal Habitats: Scale-Dependent Patterns Ryan L
    LONG-BILLED CURLEW DISTRIBUTIONS IN INTERTIDAL HABITATS: SCALE-DEPENDENT PATTERNS RYAN L. MATHIS, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, Cali- fornia 95521 (current address: National Wild Turkey Federation, P. O. Box 1050, Arcata, California 95518) MARK A. ColwELL, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521; [email protected] LINDA W. LEEMAN, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 (current address: EDAW, Inc., 2022 J. St., Sacramento, California 95814) THOMAS S. LEEMAN, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 (current address: Environmental Science Associates, 8950 Cal Center Drive, Suite 300, Sacramento, California 95826) ABSTRACT. Key ecological insights come from understanding a species’ distribu- tion, especially across several spatial scales. We studied the distribution (uniform, random, or aggregated) at low tide of nonbreeding Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) at three spatial scales: within individual territories (1–8 ha), in the Elk River estuary (~50 ha), and across tidal habitats of Humboldt Bay (62 km2), Cali- fornia. During six baywide surveys, 200–300 Long-billed Curlews were aggregated consistently in certain areas and were absent from others, suggesting that foraging habitats varied in quality. In the Elk River estuary, distributions were often (73%) uniform as curlews foraged at low tide, although patterns tended toward random (27%) when more curlews were present during late summer and autumn. Patterns of predominantly uniform distribution across the estuary were a consequence of ter- ritoriality. Within territories, eight Long-billed Curlews most often (75%) foraged in a manner that produced a uniform distribution; patterns tended toward random (16%) and aggregated (8%) when individuals moved over larger areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Arcata Marsh & Wildlife Sanctuary Bird Checklist
    Arcata Marsh & Wildlife Sanctuary Bird Checklist Arcata, Humboldt County, California (Updated Fall 2014) The following list of 327 species was updated by Rob Fowler and David Fix in 2014 from the list they compiled in 2009. Data came from sightings entered in eBird; Stanley Harris's Northwest California Bird (2005, 1996, 1991); historical records in North American Birds magazine and its supporting unpublished Humboldt County summaries; the 2006 edition Arcata Marsh bird checklist (Elias Elias); the 1995 edition Arcata Marsh bird checklist (Kristina Van Wert); and personal communications with many birders. Formatting by Camden Bruner. Call the Northwest California Bird Alert at (707) 822-5666 to report or hear reports of rare birds! Abbreviations: A - Abundant; occurs in large numbers C - Common; likely to be found U - Uncommon; occurs in small numbers, found with seearching R - Rare; expected in very small numbers, not likely to be found Ca - Casual; several records, possibly may occur regularly Ac - Accidental; 1-3 records, not reasonably expected to occur Sp - Spring (Marsh - May) S - Summer (June to mid-July) F - Fall (mid-July through November) W - Winter (December through February) Here Waterfowl: Breeds Spring Summer Fall Winter _____ Greater White-fronted Goose R R R _____ Emperor Goose Ac _____ Snow Goose Ca Ca Ca _____ Ross's Goose Ca Ca Ca _____ Brant U Ac U R _____ Cackling Goose A U C _____ Canada Goose C C C C yes _____ Tundra Swan Ca Ca _____ Wood Duck U U U U yes _____ Gadwall C C C C yes _____ Eurasian Wigeon R U R _____
    [Show full text]
  • Population Analysis and Community Workshop for Far Eastern Curlew Conservation Action in Pantai Cemara, Desa Sungai Cemara – Jambi
    POPULATION ANALYSIS AND COMMUNITY WORKSHOP FOR FAR EASTERN CURLEW CONSERVATION ACTION IN PANTAI CEMARA, DESA SUNGAI CEMARA – JAMBI Final Report Small Grant Fund of the EAAFP Far Eastern Curlew Task Force Iwan Febrianto, Cipto Dwi Handono & Ragil S. Rihadini Jambi, Indonesia 2019 The aim of this project are to Identify the condition of Far Eastern Curlew Population and the remaining potential sites for Far Eastern Curlew stopover in Sumatera, Indonesia and protect the remaining stopover sites for Far Eastern Curlew by educating the government, local people and community around the sites as the effort of reducing the threat of habitat degradation, habitat loss and human disturbance at stopover area. INTRODUCTION The Far Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariencis) is the largest shorebird in the world and is endemic to East Asian – Australian Flyway. It is one of the Endangered migratory shorebird with estimated global population at 38.000 individual, although a more recent update now estimates the population at 32.000 (Wetland International, 2015 in BirdLife International, 2017). An analysis of monitoring data collected from around Australia and New Zealand (Studds et al. in prep. In BirdLife International, 2017) suggests that the species has declined much more rapidly than was previously thought; with an annual rate of decline of 0.058 equating to a loss of 81.7% over three generations. Habitat loss occuring as a result of development is the most significant threat currently affecting migratory shorebird along the EAAF (Melville et al. 2016 in EAAFP 2017). Loss of habitat at critical stopover sites in the Yellow Sea is suspected to be the key threat to this species and given that it is restricted to East Asian - Australasian Flyway, the declines in the non-breeding are to be representative of the global population.
    [Show full text]
  • The Systematic Position of the Surfbird, Aphriza Virgata
    THE SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE SURFBIRD, APHRIZA VIRGATA JOSEPH R. JEHL, JR. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 The taxonomic relationships of the Surfbird, ( 1884) elevated the tumstone-Surfbird unit Aphriza virgata, have long been one of the to family rank. But, although they stated (p. most controversial problems in shorebird clas- 126) that Aphrizu “agrees very closely” with sification. Although the species has been as- Arenaria, the only points of similarity men- signed to a monotypic family (Shufeldt 1888; tioned were “robust feet, without trace of web Ridgway 1919), most modern workers agree between toes, the well formed hind toe, and that it should be placed with the turnstones the strong claws; the toes with a lateral margin ( Arenaria spp. ) in the subfamily Arenariinae, forming a broad flat under surface.” These even though they have reached no consensuson differences are hardly sufficient to support the affinities of this subfamily. For example, familial differentiation, or even to suggest Lowe ( 1931), Peters ( 1934), Storer ( 1960), close generic relationship. and Wetmore (1965a) include the Arenariinae Coues (1884605) was uncertain about the in the Scolopacidae (sandpipers), whereas Surfbirds’ relationships. He called it “a re- Wetmore (1951) and the American Ornithol- markable isolated form, perhaps a plover and ogists ’ Union (1957) place it in the Charadri- connecting this family with the next [Haema- idae (plovers). The reasons for these diverg- topodidae] by close relationships with Strep- ent views have never been stated. However, it silas [Armaria], but with the hind toe as well seems that those assigning the Arenariinae to developed as usual in Sandpipers, and general the Charadriidae have relied heavily on their appearance rather sandpiper-like than plover- views of tumstone relationships, because schol- like.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds Along Lehi's Trail
    Journal of Book of Mormon Studies Volume 15 Number 2 Article 10 7-31-2006 Birds Along Lehi's Trail Stephen L. Carr Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Carr, Stephen L. (2006) "Birds Along Lehi's Trail," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Vol. 15 : No. 2 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol15/iss2/10 This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title Birds Along Lehi’s Trail Author(s) Stephen L. Carr Reference Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 15/2 (2006): 84–93, 125–26. ISSN 1065-9366 (print), 2168-3158 (online) Abstract When Carr traveled to the Middle East, he observed the local birds. In this article, he suggests the possi- bility that the Book of Mormon prophet Lehi and his family relied on birds for food and for locating water. Carr discusses the various birds that Lehi’s family may have seen on their journey and the Mosaic law per- taining to those birds. Birds - ALOnG LEHI’S TRAIL stephen l. cARR 84 VOLUME 15, NUMBER 2, 2006 PHOTOGRAPHy By RICHARD wELLINGTOn he opportunity to observe The King James translators apparently ex- birds of the Middle East came to perienced difficulty in knowing exactly which me in September 2000 as a member Middle Eastern birds were meant in certain pas- Tof a small group of Latter-day Saints1 traveling in sages of the Hebrew Bible.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Breeding Phenology Across Ten Decades Show Varying Adjustments to Environmental Changes in Four Wader Species
    Bird Study ISSN: 0006-3657 (Print) 1944-6705 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tbis20 Trends in breeding phenology across ten decades show varying adjustments to environmental changes in four wader species Hans Meltofte, Ole Amstrup, Troels Leuenhagen Petersen, Frank Rigét & Anders P. Tøttrup To cite this article: Hans Meltofte, Ole Amstrup, Troels Leuenhagen Petersen, Frank Rigét & Anders P. Tøttrup (2018) Trends in breeding phenology across ten decades show varying adjustments to environmental changes in four wader species, Bird Study, 65:1, 44-51, DOI: 10.1080/00063657.2018.1444014 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00063657.2018.1444014 Published online: 20 Mar 2018. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 49 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tbis20 BIRD STUDY, 2018 VOL. 65, NO. 1, 44–51 https://doi.org/10.1080/00063657.2018.1444014 Trends in breeding phenology across ten decades show varying adjustments to environmental changes in four wader species Hans Meltoftea, Ole Amstrupb, Troels Leuenhagen Petersenc, Frank Rigéta and Anders P. Tøttrupc aDepartment of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark; bAmphi Consult, Aalborg, Denmark; cCenter for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Capsule: During 1928–2016, initiation of egg-laying advanced in two wader species, remained Received 8 May 2017 unchanged in one, and was delayed in one species. The changes across years and variation Accepted 19 February 2018 among species can be explained by climatic variables and differences in migratory strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Shorebird Profiles
    List of Shorebird Profiles Pacific Central Atlantic Species Page Flyway Flyway Flyway American Oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus) •513 American Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) •••499 Black-bellied Plover (Pluvialis squatarola) •488 Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) •••501 Black Oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani)•490 Buff-breasted Sandpiper (Tryngites subruficollis) •511 Dowitcher (Limnodromus spp.)•••485 Dunlin (Calidris alpina)•••483 Hudsonian Godwit (Limosa haemestica)••475 Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus)•••492 Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) ••503 Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa)••505 Pacific Golden-Plover (Pluvialis fulva) •497 Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa)••473 Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres)•••479 Sanderling (Calidris alba)•••477 Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus)••494 Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia)•••507 Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda)•509 Western Sandpiper (Calidris mauri) •••481 Wilson’s Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) ••515 All illustrations in these profiles are copyrighted © George C. West, and used with permission. To view his work go to http://www.birchwoodstudio.com. S H O R E B I R D S M 472 I Explore the World with Shorebirds! S A T R ER G S RO CHOOLS P Red Knot (Calidris canutus) Description The Red Knot is a chunky, medium sized shorebird that measures about 10 inches from bill to tail. When in its breeding plumage, the edges of its head and the underside of its neck and belly are orangish. The bird’s upper body is streaked a dark brown. It has a brownish gray tail and yellow green legs and feet. In the winter, the Red Knot carries a plain, grayish plumage that has very few distinctive features. Call Its call is a low, two-note whistle that sometimes includes a churring “knot” sound that is what inspired its name.
    [Show full text]
  • Iucn Red Data List Information on Species Listed On, and Covered by Cms Appendices
    UNEP/CMS/ScC-SC4/Doc.8/Rev.1/Annex 1 ANNEX 1 IUCN RED DATA LIST INFORMATION ON SPECIES LISTED ON, AND COVERED BY CMS APPENDICES Content General Information ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Species in Appendix I ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Mammalia ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Aves ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Reptilia ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Pisces .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • POLICY OPTIONS for MIGRATORY BIRD FLYWAYS CMS Flyways Working Group: Review 3
    CONVENTION ON MIGRATORY SPECIES POLICY OPTIONS FOR MIGRATORY BIRD FLYWAYS CMS Flyways Working Group: Review 3 Colin A Galbraith March 2011 CMS Contract No 14550 and additional staff time from Colin Galbraith Environment Limited Policy Options for Migratory Bird Flyways CMS Flyways Working Group: Review 3 CONTENTS PAGE Executive summary 3 Introduction 14 1.1 Background and approach used 14 The major flyways 15 2.1 Flyways 15 2.2 The status of species on flyways 20 Coverage of existing CMS and non CMS instruments and frameworks 22 3.1 Summary of existing agreements 22 3.2 Gaps in geographical coverage 22 3.3 Coverage of species groups 23 3.4 Priorities to fill the gaps in coverage 24 The key pressures impacting on migratory birds 25 4.1 Habitat loss, fragmentation and reduction in quality 26 4.2 Climate change 28 4.3 By-catch 30 4.4 Unsustainable use 32 4.5 Lead shot and other poisons 35 4.6 Invasive alien species 36 4.7 Agricultural conflicts and pest control 37 4.8 Disease 38 4.9 Information gaps 39 2 Priorities for the development of CMS instruments to cover flyways 40 5.1 The role of CMS 40 5.2 Geographical priorities 41 5.3 Species priorities 46 Options for CMS instruments for migratory bird conservation 49 6.1 High level policy options 50 6.2 Developing a new approach 51 6.3 Identification of priorities and a plan for action 55 6.4 Mechanisms for action 59 6.5 Issues of profile 61 6.6 Practicalities 61 Annex 1 Timetable for major forthcoming meetings 64 Annex 2 Threatened waterbirds in the East Asian-Australasian Flyway 67 Annex 3
    [Show full text]